Case Activity (5934)

1. Order | Filed: October 02, 2026 FOX Corporation et al v. Media Deportes Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.

   Trademark | New York Southern

   Order

   ORDER APPROVING FIFTH INTERIM APPLICATION OF THE RECEIVER FOR ALLOWANCE OF COMPENSATION OF REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES granting 291 Motion for Attorney Fees; granting 292 Motion for Attorney Fees. ORDERED that the Application is approved such t hat compensation for the services provided by the Receiver and his Mexico counsel, Hidalgo y Mendoza, S.C. ("GHM") rendered between August 23, 2026, Through and Including September 22, 2026 (the "Application Period") in the amount of $51,228.67, is allowed as an interim allowance, and reimbursement of expenses advanced by the Receiver and GHM during the Application Period in the amount of $3,639.04. is allowed as an interim disbursement payment. (Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff on 10/2/2026) (jjc)

2. Order | Filed: October 02, 2026 | Entered: October 02, 2026 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Xia et al

   Securities/Commodities | New York Eastern

   Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel

   ORDER: The Court approves, as per the attached Order, the 832 motion of Michael I. Goldberg, the Liquidation Receiver to retain the services of Michael T. Carr and Akerman LLP as Counsel to the Liquidation Receiver ("Receiver's Counsel"). The Court finds that the retention of Michael T. Carr and Akerman LLP is consistent with Mr. Goldberg's authority and duties as the Liquidation Receiver, as set forth in the Court's 812 Order appointing him as such. (See Order Appointing Liquidation Receiver, Dkt. 812, ¶ 9(b) (authorizing the Receiver to retain legal counsel to advise on title issues, negotiate and document purchase agreements, manage the closing of title, and address any legal issues arising in connection with the sale of the Subject Properties).) Though Receiver's Counsel has filed a letter clarifying that, contrary to its earlier representation, (see Dkt. 832 at 1), the appointment request is not "unopposed," the Court infers that this means that neither Receiver nor Receiver's Counsel has solicited any party's view on the proposed appointment, not that any party opposes it. (See Dkt. 833.) The Court notes its concern about Receiver Counsel's high hourly rate and reiterates that, under the attached Order, this and all other hourly rates "remain[] subject to the Court's review and approval" and that "[n]othing in th[e] Order approves or allows any particular fee or expense." Moreover, "[w]ithin forty-five (45) days after the end of each calendar quarter, the Liquidation Receiver and Retained Personnel shall apply to the Court for compensation and expense reimbursement[.]" (Order Appointing Liquidation Receiver, Dkt. 812, ¶¶ 27–29.) Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 10/2/2026. (AB)

3. 5932 additional result(s)